Letters by a modern St. Ferdinand III about cults

Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands. Cults everywhere: Islam, the State, the cult of Gay and Queer, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, 'Science', Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion....a nice variety for the human-hater, amoral, anti-rationalist to choose from. It is so much fun mocking them isn't it ?

Thursday, August 22, 2013

Darwinism, beyond faith into fantasy.

Hitler, Stalin et al were very fond of Mr. Darwin.

by StFerdIII

The cult of Darwin and evolution is simply the proclamation by Atheists-Materialists, of a sordid fantasy world, one designed to remove ethics, morals, the hard work of faith and even common-sense. It is a cult of the lowest order. There is no science in Darwinism. The chance that protozoa 'evolved' into the 100 Trillion cell complexity of the human is about as real, as claiming that Hitler was a pious Catholic and defender of church and morals. Darwinists share much in common with other Atheists-Fascists including Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao including a proclivity to fraud, lies, intolerance, and the use of force to achieve materialist aims.

There is so little science in Darwin and such a profound depth of faith – immoral assuredly – that one has to wonder about the sanity of the evolutionary-believer. Do you really believe that a 100 Trillion cell human organism with a higher consciousness evolved from single-celled bacteria formed from abiogenesis, via the rhetoric of 'random chance' impacted by 'time', stimulated by trillions of 'mutations' which always are neutral or negative ? Holy cow. This is dumb.

It does not matter where you look, Darwin's fraud has no proof to support it. The fossil world, the climactic-catastrophic record, single-cell complexity, DNA and epigenetics, and the paucity of 'natural selection' and mutational-variation make the entire theory an unsubstantiated nonsense. It is certainly not scientific. It is embarrassing to hear people preach like strutting peacocks how 'smart' they are, because they pray to Darwin, the god of random chance, and the goddess of myth, fairy-tales and 'we will find the proof later'.

Some obvious reasons why Darwinism is a sordid mess:

Abiogenesis was disproven in 1862 by Pasteur yet evolutionists still hold that life can arise from non-life. This offends thermodynamic laws.

Long litany of fraud exists in providing 'missing links'. None exist in the fossil record. The cult of Darwin for 150 years has tried to declare such linkages whilst committing outright and outrageous fraud in creating such non-existent intermediary species.

Cambrian explosion of 544 million years ago reveals 23 phyla of animals with advanced organs and exoskeletons which did not exist previously. Nothing in the pre-Cambrian strata indicates evolution to these complicated forms.

Every new 'feature' involves DNA and new cell creation. Evolution has not provided any empirical proof that DNA can be changed inter-species, nor how new forms of cells can be created. Not one single 'experiment' can prove either.

Darwin's fraud relies heavily on mutations. But (1) Mutations are always harmful and frequently lethal; and (2) mutations never, never change one species into another.

DNA is the most complex digital information code ever created and the human has 48 feet of it. Is it reasonable to infer this is by chance ? Software is written in perfect form and syntax by itself ?

The probability of producing the human genome by relying on random mutations is akin to that of generating a library of a thousand volumes by making random changes or additions to a single phrase. Rather impossible.

Mutations would have to generate, or “search” by trial and error, an enormous number of possibilities—far more than were realistic in the time available to the evolutionary process.

DNA complexity and intra-cellular dependencies makes the complex single cell into a mystery. DNA needs proteins and amino-acids, RNA needs ribosomes, ribosomes are dependent on RNA. So what came first and how ?

The average gene has about 1000 bases, then an average protein would have over 300 amino acids, each of which are called “residues” by protein chemists. Proteins require hundreds of amino acids in order to perform their functions. Such complexity makes the chance of such arrangements occurring through blind processes, less than zero.

One could list ad-infinitum the objections to Darwin's Atheist cult. Darwinism is not science but a belief system. Bacteria became humans through the god of chance and luck; and we are therefore independent of external constraints such as ethics, morality, and characteristics of virtue, humility, charity and the golden rule, are now banal and unimportant. Indeed 'natural selection' favours the uncouth, the brutal, the immoral and distinctly evil. No wonder Hitler loved Atheism and was fond of Darwin.